Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Section 4, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 376 -- Penetrative sexual assault - Victim who was minor not only subjected to aggravated penetrative sexual assault by accused but he had also impregnated her as a consequence of such sexual assault - She died after delivering a child - Evidence of Doctors coupled with DNA..........
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Section 4, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 376 -- Penetrative sexual assault - Reduction of sentence - Considering the young age of accused and his future prospects in his profession as a Disk Jocky as well as fact of his willingness to provide adequate compensation to Child, no fruitful purpose would be served in..........
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 376, 34, Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Section 3, 4, 5, 6 -- Rape of 10 years old girl by her own father - Evidence of twin sister of victim - DW2 sister of victim asked victim about the incident whereupon victim stated that case was filed as instructed by their mother and grandmother - Victim also told DW2 that..........
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 376, 34, Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Section 3, 4, 5, 6 -- Rape of 10 years old girl by her own father - Evidence of mother of victim - CW1, mother of victim was not offered as witness by prosecution and she was examined as a Court witness - She stated that incident was first told by victim to her grandmother,..........
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 376, 34, Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Section 3, 4, 5, 6 -- Rape of 10 years old girl by her own father - Evidence of victim - Victim is a child witness - No corroborating evidence is forthcoming to support her version - There is no medical evidence on record - More so, there is inconsistent version of victim in..........
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 482, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 304B, 498A, Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, Section 3, 4 -- Quashing of FIR - Misuse of process of law by filing successive applications suppressing material facts and documents and misleading Court - Applicant has not come to Court with clean hands - Petition rejected with cost of Rs.25,000/-...........
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302, 460, 396, Arms Act, 1959, Section 25 -- Murder - Recovery of ornaments is the only piece of evidence against accused, which is extremely weak - There is no other material on record which could even remotely be taken against accused - Accused acquitted on the benefit of doubt...........
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 392, 34 -- Dacoity - As per prosecution, seven named persons had committed dacoity - Five out of them were acquitted - Two persons cannot be convicted u/s 392 IPC r/w S.34 IPC, going by very nature of charge of dacoity...........
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 353, 341, 506, 188, 149 -- Assaulting public servants and restraining them from discharging their official duties - An improvement for the reason that the same does not find place either in the FIR or in the statement of complainant recorded u/s 161 Cr.P.C. - It would be futile exercise even if the matter is put to trial - Proceedings..........
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 379A, 411, 34 -- Offence u/ss 379-A, 411, 34 IPC - Conviction - Complainant in his cross-examination voluntarily stating that prior to lodging FIR he was not acquainted with names and identities of accused only after his seeing a footage of CCTV cameras as were installed at place of occurrence - However, best electronic evidence did not..........
